The @NYTimes could have built a social network around subscriber profiles (Remember Times People?), invested in a commenting system & building communities:
mashable.com/2008/09/22/tim…
What @NYTFood did: built up a Facebook Group, & left it:
Notable context:
mashable.com/2008/09/22/tim…
What @NYTFood did: built up a Facebook Group, & left it:
https://twitter.com/benyt/status/1372560609825415174
Notable context:
https://twitter.com/RebekahKTromble/status/1372568357023662087
@nytimes @nytfood Per @Benyt, kernel of the problem was a @NYTimes staffer "moderating comments for Facebook rather than working for the Times."
This POV seems off.
Over the past decade, editors spent time moderating social media as part of their work.
That was labor, & many were told to do it.
This POV seems off.
Over the past decade, editors spent time moderating social media as part of their work.
That was labor, & many were told to do it.
IMO, @NYTimes would be FAR better off closing group, citing @Facebook's new rules & say it decided not to add the staff it would need to moderate ~77,000 folks (& maybe cite other biz practices), & offer all 3 free months of @nytfood & a warm invitation to comment on recipe pages
@nytimes @Facebook @nytfood A weekly dispatch from @SamSifton is one of my favorite newsletters – I always learn something new & am inspired – & the @nytfood recipes are consistently excellent. Its community could be as well, if the @NYTimes invests in hosting those conversations via @coralproject or other.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
